All aboard the MTA gravy train!
 |
| Ed Reiskin on Bike to Work Day Photo from Streetsblog |
That the MTA, with more than 5,000 employees, has become more of a jobs program than a transit agency is illustrated by this jobs notice---six-figure salaries plus benefits, including discounts with Carshare and Zipcar, which will get you there a lot faster than Muni and other public transit systems that are for the peasants:
Get discounts for personal memberships with City Carshare and Zipcar. Carsharing companies offer all sizes and types of vehicles throughout the Bay Area for you to reserve and use when you need it. Insurance, gas, and maintenance are included. Have the convenience of a car without the hassle and cost!
The head engineer on the gravy train is Ed Reiskin, who was hired two years ago at $294,000 a year.
The SF Weekly thinks he's a crackerjack administrator:
Reiskin's expertise is in management. His sterling reputation for competence is such that he may be able to execute even the most dubious of endeavors the agency has tasked him with.
Reiskin's main "expertise" is really in feathering his nest. His hiring was essentially political, since he's a bike guy who brags about not owning a car since 1991, which made him the perfect guy to implement the city's anti-car "endeavors."
That's also why the city hires people from the Bicycle Coalition: here, here, and here.
Thanks to ENUF for the link.
Thanks to ENUF for the link.
Labels: Andy Thornley, Anti-Car, Bicycle Coalition, City Cars, City Government, Ed Reiskin, Muni
posted by Rob Anderson @ 12:07 PM
12 comments
12 Comments:
How are we going to reduce car traffic in the city? It's the third worst in the country!!!
"Car traffic"---and traffic from trucks, motorcycles, etc.---is here to stay. See this and this. There are more motor vehicles registered in SF now---463,833---than there were ten years ago. And the DMV's count doesn't include vehicles registered outside of SF. More than 35,000 vehicles enter SF every workday, because the city is the major regional jobs hub.
The city is rapidly gentrifying, and the neo-gentry have cars and places to park them. More than 16 million people visited SF last year, and most of them either drove their own cars or rental cars.
Since tourism is our largest industry, it would be suicidal for the city to discourage visitors from driving to and around the city.
There are more than 1,000 Muni vehicles on city streets and more than 1,500 taxis.
The realistic alternative to driving in SF is the Muni system, which is chronically underfunded.
Instead of planning sensibly to manage all this traffic, City Hall is methodically making it harder to drive and park in the city with a predatory parking patrol and anti-car "improvements" to city streets, like taking away street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes for a tiny PC minority.
Add to this City Hall's aggressive pro-development policies---it's called "smart growth"!---to bring tens of thousands of new residents to the city, often in new housing developments that have limited or no parking.
Rob - you are so dumb it makes my head spin.
The discounts from City Carshare and Zipcar are NOT FUNDED by SFMTA. SFMTA negotiated discounts for their employees that come from Zipcar and City Carshare. A "marketing program" as it were.
I'll repeat question since you didn't answer it: How are we going to reduce car traffic in the city?
"policies..to bring tens of thousands of new residents to the city"
Well, you've identified the problem right there, Rob. The city needs to just stop bringing new residents to the city! Quit rounding them up from around the world and shipping them to SF against their will! When will the city stop violating the human rights of these poor victims?
"Rob, you are so dumb it makes my head spin. The discounts from City Carshare and Zipcar are NOT FUNDED by SFMTA. SFMTA negotiated discounts for their employees that come from Zipcar and City Carshare."
I didn't say otherwise, moron. That the MTA provides this perk for its already-overpaid workers in what's supposedly a transit system is the point. Your head is spinning so fast you have a reading disorder.
"I'll repeat question since you didn't answer it: How are we going to reduce car traffic in the city?"
You keep repeating the question because you can't come to grips with my answer above.
MTA is not providing the perk. Zip car and city car share offered it to them and they took it.
Perhaps you believe that SFMTA should refuse additional benefits that third party companies offer for free?
For crying out loud - this is the same discount Zipcar offers SFBC members, or people who buy a green zebra coupon book. It's harder for the SFMTA to offer drinking fountains .
I'll repeat your non-answer because you refer to it as an answer:
---
"Car traffic"---and traffic from trucks, motorcycles, etc.---is here to stay. See this and this. There are more motor vehicles registered in SF now---463,833---than there were ten years ago. And the DMV's count doesn't include vehicles registered outside of SF. More than 35,000 vehicles enter SF every workday, because the city is the major regional jobs hub.
The city is rapidly gentrifying, and the neo-gentry have cars and places to park them. More than 16 million people visited SF last year, and most of them either drove their own cars or rental cars.
Since tourism is our largest industry, it would be suicidal for the city to discourage visitors from driving to and around the city.
There are more than 1,000 Muni vehicles on city streets and more than 1,500 taxis.
The realistic alternative to driving in SF is the Muni system, which is chronically underfunded.
Instead of planning sensibly to manage all this traffic, City Hall is methodically making it harder to drive and park in the city with a predatory parking patrol and anti-car "improvements" to city streets, like taking away street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes for a tiny PC minority.
Add to this City Hall's aggressive pro-development policies---it's called "smart growth"!---to bring tens of thousands of new residents to the city, often in new housing developments that have limited or no parking.
---
Where's the answer in that? Our streets are clogged with traffic every day, and you have no solution to that problem.
"There are more than 1,000 Muni vehicles on city streets and more than 1,500 taxis."
What point are you trying to make with that? Should there be more, or less?
"Instead of planning sensibly to manage all this traffic"
What does that look like? How do we "plan" for that?
Rob, you have no answers for the debilitating vehicle traffic in our city, and that's why you've lost every election you've entered. You have no solutions. If your solution is fewer people in the city, then you should ask yourself why the hell you live in a city.
'"Car traffic"---and traffic from trucks, motorcycles, etc.---is here to stay."
So what is your solution to reduce it? Fewer people?
"City Hall is methodically making it harder to drive and park in the city with a predatory parking patrol and anti-car "improvements" to city streets, like taking away street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes for a tiny PC minority."
What bike lanes have created traffic? Please list them.
"Add to this City Hall's aggressive pro-development policies---it's called "smart growth"!---to bring tens of thousands of new residents to the city, often in new housing developments that have limited or no parking."
If you hate growth, why do you live in a city? And why do you live in the United States? Why don't you move to a place that doesn't have a growing population?
Post a Comment
<< Home